Seven Tactics of The "Heresy Hunters" (Part 2) -- The Word Was God

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, [2], 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 06:47:43 08/10/02 Sat
Author: Rev. Jack Howell
Author Host/IP: 205.188.197.27
Subject: Seven Tactics of The "Heresy Hunters" (Part 2)

We could write volumes on how "satanic ritual abuse" sensationalism has promoted the ministries of some (and has also caused their downfall when the truth about them were exposed). Then there was the "Illuminati" sensationalism. The church seems to have our own "conspiracy theories." These are just a few examples of the sensationalism that has reared its ugly head in the church far too often.

The sensationalism has not been limited to the Charismatic movement. We have seen that the evangelicals have done well in this department too. The Heresy Hunters have especially been good at this tactic. Many of them attack anything and everything that they do not agree with and will use any way possible to get the attention of the church. Some of them have a desperate fleshly need for this attention.

Many times people ride the waves of what seems to be popular. Word-Faith bashing has been very popular for the past twelve or so years. Before that, many people were teaching "faith," "discipleship," and "deliverance." To them it was a fad. They were riding the waves of it's popularity.

Now many of these same people have become the staunchest critics of these doctrines. It's no longer fun to them. It's not the "in" thing anymore. Word-Faith bashing is now the "in" thing and they must ride the waves of opportunity before the next fad. It is so sad that when God reveals a truth to His church and people begin to walk in light of that truth, others seem to come along only for the ride, or for the sensation and thrill of the moment.

The real test of whether you believe any truth from God's Word is when that truth and its adherents come under attack and persecution. That is the time that we see whether a person truly believed what he was taught or preaching or whether he or she was riding the wave of sensationalism. Many preachers turned from the Faith movement due to the books written against it. Many of them have endorsed the books and believe that simply because they were once a part of this movement that they are now experts.

Sensational wave riders are not experts. They were only on the train for the ride. They did not get grounded in the true principles of faith teaching and some of them were probably the biggest propagators of it's excesses. That's the result of just coming along for the ride. We will see what happens as this wave of Word-Faith name calling popularity begins to die down. What train will many of these men and women hop on next?

6. Theological Prejudice/Bias in interpreting proof texts of those that they disagree with

If Word-Faith (which is primarily an Arminian movement) interprets Scripture from and Arminian viewpoint, their accusers will use the Calvinistic interpretaion. If Word-Faith interprets a passage from a covenantal viewpoint then the heresy hunter will use the dispensational argument to refute those that they oppose. In other words, the Heresy Hunter uses whatever method he possibly can to prove to his listeners/readers that those whose ministries they wish to destroy are wrong and heretical.

There are those who feel that one MUST embrace a particular theological system (either Calvinism or Arminianism) and stick only with the tenets of that system or they are in error. Unfortunately for the heresy hunter, Word-Faith and other Charismatics have defied such logic by seemingly incorporating a mixture of both theological systems in each case.

Jeff Beard in his testimony, "Freedom from the Faith Movement: The Personal Testimony of Jeff Beard" shows how his freedom was achieved theologically:

My eagerness for answers was soon satisfied, for I received a book from John MacArthur, Jr., that addressed many of
the concerns I had -- _and he used Scripture._ I then purchased a book by G. Campbell Morgan, and was given still
another book by Dr. Martyn Lloyd Jones. For the first time, I felt I was eating real spiritual food. The Bible was coming
together at last, and I saw clearly that God was a _personal_ God and not just a bunch of spiritual laws to tap into.[22]

Notice the writings that had the major affect on Beard's theological perspective. I am not as familiar with Martin Lloyd Jones (though I am told that he supported the Charismatic movement) but I can certainly show the reader the anti-Pentecostal and anti-charismatic bias of the other two writers.

In case the reader is not informed, John MacArthur is the pastor of one of the most thriving Reformed Calvinist churches in this nation. He is also the author of a popular book titled Charismatic Chaos, a book that criticizes everything Charismatic. MacArthur is well known for his cessationist theology.

Pentecostal historian Vinson Synan, in his book, The Holiness-Pentecostal movement records this statement concerning Dr. G. Campbell Morgan at the beginning of the Pentecostal revival: "Dr. G. Campbell Morgan, one of the most respected preachers of the twentieth century, called the Pentecostal movement 'the last vomit of Satan.'"[23]

Another writer who seems to have changed Beard's views concerning the Faith Movement happens to be a someone whose writing I also enjoy. Nevertheless, this person also falls into the category of a Reformed Calvinist/Cessationist. His name is A.W. Pink:

We soon accepted a position as associate pastors and Bible school directors in another state and shoved off to put to
use all we had been taught. To prepare for my Bible classes, I studied for hours in the Bible alongside the writings of
A.W. Pink. (No, Rhema did not endorse or promote the writings of Pink.) This was probably the best thing I had going
for me. After a few months of Pink's writings conflicting with my Rhema theology, I knew I needed some answers.[24]

Notice that Pink's writings conflicted with "Rhema theology." I have read Pink's writings and I have been blessed by them. However, "Rhema theology" as Mr. Beard refers to it comes from an Arminian/Wesleyan/Holiness/Pentecostal background (in spite of what the critics say). Pink, like MacArthur and probably Morgan are from the Calvinistic/Reformed/Cessationist background. This is not only a CONFLICT, but a MAJOR one.

I have no problems with people changing their theological position. That is their perogative. What I have a problem with is Word-Faith critics who pose as Charismatics/Pentecostals and yet embrace theological positions that conflict with the labels they claim. There is nothing wrong with a person reading the writings of those with opposing theological views. I have done this and continue to do it. However, if these views are in conflict with one's foundational teachings, would it not be better to refer to the Scriptures to bring the understanding you need rather than totally throw away your foundation?

In a book review by CRI concerning one book criticizing the faith movement, the reviewer makes this statement:

A distinctively "Reformed" analysis, packed with quotes and footnotes. At its best when refuting the biblical proof-texts
most often used by Faith teachers; at its weakest when relating Faith teachings to the Mind Science cults and the New
Age movement. [25]

The book that was reviewed is titled, Man as God: The Word of Faith Movement, was written by Curtis Crenshaw, an associate of John
MacArthur. Notice that the CRI reviewer acknowledges that the book was written from the reformed perspective and found the book to be at it's "best" while refuting the Faith teachers from the Scriptures (but thankfully the reviewer felt that the metaphysical and New Age connections were weak).

The Word-Faith critics have portrayed themselves as Pentecostals and Charismatics while at the same time blasting anything that was birthed from this movement and endorsing the writings of nonCharismatics. By this portrayal, these critics have successfully turned the hearts of other Pentecostals and Charismatics against the Word-Faith movement.

I have noticed in my conversations with ex-Word of Faith people that the majority of them embrace Reformed theology. In most cases they may add certain Charismatic distinctives. Nevertheless, while rejecting the Word-Faith movement they usually reject all Arminian/Wesleyan views and totally embrace Calvinism - minus Calvin's cessationism in most cases.

Many who embrace Calvinism believe that Calvinism is the gospel and that the five point Calvinistic system of Bible interpretation (known as TULIP) is the correct way to interpret the Bible. Any other method is believed to lead a person into error. Not all become critics of the
Word-Faith. Many of them are thankful for what they have learned from the movement. Unfortunately, too many others who leave the movement become critics of it and build websites and write books and pamphlets against it. While criticizing the faith teachers for being "arrogant," they show their own arrogance by their pride in their "theological" position.

Men like T.D. Jakes have also been the subject of this heresy hunting crusade. Jakes, who pastors the 23.000 member Potter's House Church in Dallas, Texas has been criticized by both Hank Hanegraaf, current president of the Christian Research Institute and Jerry Buckner, a radio host and pastor. While some feel that Jakes may be the successor to Billy Graham, a world renowned evangelist, Buckner has a different opinion:

"T.D. Jakes is a cult leader and his ministry is a cult," Buckner told "Charisma" magazine last week. "He needs to
repent of his theology if he is to be considered the next Billy Graham."[26]

I suppose Buckner must have a considerable voting share in the "Billy Graham successor" stock. I guess Jakes success at winning the lost to Christ does not qualify in the eyes of those who are focused on "theology." Not so much correct theology but not embracing their theology (by the way, I am a Trinitarian). Buckner goes on to question Jakes integrity by saying, "Jakes is hiding his ties to Oneness Pentecostalism in order to be accepted in the mainstream."[27] This article goes on to say:

Buckner branded Jakes a heretic because of the Oneness ties, and because of a statement on the T.D. Jakes
Ministries Web site that says God "exists in three manifestations." Buckner and Hanegraaff's California-based
Christian Research Institute maintain that the use of the word "manifestation" is theologically unsound, and they insist
that Jakes must correct his view by stating that the Trinity is "three separate persons."

Jakes said, "I believe in one God. I believe in the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. I believe that these three are
distinct and separate in their function. Their distinctives are so separate that each has individual attributes, yet they are
one. I do not believe in three Gods."[28]

"Theologically unsound?!!!!" This is such a ridiculous excuse to brand someone a heretic. This is a blatant attempt to either get someone to
conform to your "theological jargon" or brand the person as a "heretic." I suppose Buckner, Hanegraaf, and CRI will now be telling us what is proper "theological wording" for our statements of faith. Perhaps the word "manifested" is a theologically unsound word to Hanegraaf and Buckner but the Holy Spirit may have felt differently when He had John write his epistle:

He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was
manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil. - John 3:8

Think John would have been branded a heretic by today's theological standards? Simply because Jakes does not use the "correct theological" wording acceptable to Buckner and Hanegraaf, he has become a heretic. Ministries such as Buckner's and CRI feel that if one is not embracing theology as they believe it, then they are not adhereing to the "right" theology.

Does Embracing The "Right" Theology Make One Superior?

Ted Rouse, who has written a book in defense of the Word-Faith movement titled: Faith and The Pharisees, Has this to say about the theological perspectives of some Word-Faith critics:

People, especially religious men, who are bound and blinded by their own theological beliefs, will see only what they
are looking for as they search to prove that their theology is right and what others believe is wrong. The sad part is they
dishonestly twist and use whatever they can, true or not, to make their point, all in the name of religion.[29]

I share Brother Rouse's opinion concerning many religious men. However, both Rouse and I could be bias concerning the theology of these critics since we are both sympathetic to the Word-Faith movement. However, another author who is not so sympathetic to this movement, Neil T. Anderson, has made a similar observation:

The only one who is right is God. We think we are defending the truth, but what we are actually defending is our
theological position and worldview. Nobody has a perfect perspective of reality, and nobody fully knows the truth. We
are not omniscient, and we all have a grid by which we interpret and evaluate life. I am not committed to my theology,
and I'm certainly not committed to yours. What I am committed to is the truth. Theology is man's attempt to systematize
truth.[30]

Maybe the reader may better understand and receive an opinion of bias theology from someone outside of the Faith Movement and who is not sympathetic to it. Understand that we are all "bias" in the sense that we may embrace certain theological positions. However, all of us do not use our "bias" in the same way that the Heresy Hunter does. His intent is to discredit and perhaps destroy the ministry he opposes.

One of the most skilled "Theologians" of his time threw away all dead theology for what Kenyon has popularly labeled "revelation knowledge:"

Though I might also have confidence in the flesh. If any other man thinketh that he hath whereof he might trust in the
flesh, I more: Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as
touching the law, a Pharisee; Concerning zeal, persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in the law,
blameless. But what things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ. Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss
for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do
count them but dung, that I may win Christ - Phil. 3:4-8

Man may accuse Word-Faith for our desire to be taught the Bible by the Holy Spirit (John 14:26) rather than following their dead theological traditions and systems. They may talk about us and persecute us but I'd rather be criticized and walk in newness of life than to conform to man's theological boundaries and have the life of God choked out of me. Usually people like this who cannot get a fresh revelation of God's Word (the Bible) have to spend time criticizing others in an attempt to make them as joyless as themselves. Theology is not bad in itself, but when we become so locked into a certain theological system that fresh truth cannot penetrate, then we have allowed the letter to kill and prevented the Spirit from giving life (2 Cor. 3:6)

7. Incorrectly using "Scholarship" to make their point

Basically, the Heresy Hunter uses "Bad Scholarship" in an attempt to make those that they oppose look ignorant. If the Heresy Hunter's
presentation looks "Scholastic" and "Well Researched" while those they oppose look like "ignorant bumpkins" then most people will be deceived by this tactic. Who can refute a book with hundreds of footnotes and references to great scholastic works while those of a group like the Word-Faith teachers refer only to the Scriptures.

Unfortunately, the "out of context" statements are pulled from hundreds of tapes, books, magazines, television shows, and other medium that most people are not going to buy or even can afford to buy. I have not read all of the material that these heresy hunters reference. However, I have read enough of the material by the faith teachers to know that some of the so called "scholarship" and "research" used by these people is not done in a prayerful manner.

There are some out there who really believe that a person cannot interpret Scripture correctly without the help of some scholarly commentaries, dictionaries, lexicons, etc. They do not feel that the Holy Spirit is sufficient for teaching a person the true meaning of the Scriptures.

Jack Deere, a minister with the Vineyard movement has received his share of criticism, especially since his excellent book, Surprised By The Power Of The Spirit, (read my review of this book) which does an outstanding job of refuting the cessationist viewpoint. One critic of the book takes issue with Deere's teaching on healing from James 5:

A work on healing cannot ignore James 5. However, it must not merely recognize the passage and then conform it to
one's predetermined theology and/or experiences, as Deere has apparently done. Nowhere does the author attempt to
deal with the text in order to answer probing questions such as, "Is the passage limited to the first century or is it
applicable today? Does it apply to all humanity or just Christians? Does it extend to all Christians or just some? Is its
purpose to prepare people to die or to restore people to quality living? Does it refer to physical, emotional, or spiritual
problems? Is the practice to be done in a public service or privately? Does the intent involve medicinal or symbolic
anointing? Is the healing miraculous or providential? Is the promise absolute or conditional?"[31]

All of these questions are the type that Scholars feel that everyone must use to study a passage. Why must we engage in such "scholarly" tactics when it comes to the Word of God? Is it not sufficient to simply believe what God says and accept it? Not according to the Scholar. I am convinced that such questioning actually undermines the Word of God:

For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye
received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that
believe. -Thess. 2:13

The Word is not going to work effectively in us if we do not receive it at face value as the Word of God for today. My Bible tells me that all Scripture is profitable (2 Tim 3:16). It tells me that all of God's promises are yes and amen (2 Cor. 1:20). When we start having to ask
questions like, "Is the passage limited to the first century or is it applicable today?" This question should not even be entertained for one moment. Yet, many feel that to not do so is anti-intellectual.

There is a place for asking questions when studying a Bible text. Nevertheless, those questions should not be the type that would cause DOUBT as to whether any promise in God's Word is applicable to the Believer today. Satan asked certain questions to Eve and Jesus intended to bring doubt to the validity of God's Word rather than to incite further study (Gen. 3:1-7; Matthew 4:1-11). Could this critic of Deere's book be doing the same? Here's another quote from this critic:

As have others, this reviewer believes that Jack Deere's work, in the main, is theologically defective. Rather than
resembling a careful study by an open-minded, trained theologian, it is more like the product of an immature new
convert who, after reading the gospels and Acts for the first time, concludes that what took place in the first century will
continue throughout the church age.[32]

This author definitely does not seek to hide his cessationist bias. The author does not believe that the Holy Spirit, who Jesus promised to send in order to be our personal Bible teacher (John 14:26) is sufficient for teaching the pupil. The cessationist cannot find a clear argument for his theology in Scripture so he must use other "scholarly methods. Much of the same thing is done in other books criticizing various Charismatic movements.

Quite often people are deceived by the intellectual argument rather than by embracing the simplicity of God's holy and written Word. After all, they do not want to appear as if they lack intelligence as it is often portrayed among Pentecostals and Charismatics by their critics, "But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise" (1 Cor. 1:27)

Peter and John did not mind appearing to the people as anti-intellectuals:

Now when they saw the boldness of Peter and John, and perceived that they were unlearned and ignorant men, they
marvelled; and they took knowledge of them, that they had been with Jesus. -Acts 4:13

Because peter and John did not fit into the theological "in group," they were made to look like they knew nothing. They were made to look like anti-intellectuals. The Bible shows us the grip that intellectualism has on people:

The officers answered, Never man spake like this man. then answered them the Pharisees, Are ye also deceived? Have
any of the rulers or of the Pharisees believed on him? But this people who knoweth not the law are cursed. Nicodemus
saith unto them, (he that came to Jesus by night, being one of them,) Doth our law judge any man, before it hear him,
and know what he doeth? They answered and said unto him, Art thou also of Galilee? Search, and look: for out of
Galilee ariseth no prophet. And every man went unto his own house. - John 7:46-53

The people of Jesus day are made to seem as if they do not know the law because they were drawn to Jesus. The standard of whether Jesus' doctrine was correct or in error was supposed to be measured by whether the "theologians" of that time accepted. This sounds quite like many of our great "scholars" today. If it does not meet the litmus test of today's theologians and if the teaching is not presented in a "scholarly" and intellectual manner, then it is heresy to them. After all, they have their doctorates of divinity and their masters in theology, so they are the experts.
It is a shame that people are more prone to believe the educated more than to seek out the truth. People would rather not have to deal with the persecution that can come from the leaders of our time. They would rather stay with the in crowd:

Nevertheless among the chief rulers also many believed on him; but because of the Pharisees they did not confess him,
lest they should be put out of the synagogue: For they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God. -John
12:42-42

There is nothing wrong with education or scholarship, but when used the way these heresy hunters have used it to attack Word-Faith and other Charismatic ministries, then it becomes a tool of Satan. The sadducees were like that. They were equivalent to the cessationists of our day. The cessationist believe that the days of God moving in the miraculous are gone. The sadducees did not believe in a resurrection (Acts 23:8). They attempted to trap Jesus using their "scholarly" argument (Matt. 22:24-33). Jesus said that there problem was that they did not know the Scriptures or God's power (Matt. 22:30).

Charles Finney, the great revivalist of the 19th century was subject to such scholarly attacks by the theologians of his day. A.M. Hill tells of one of the times Finney was subject to this persecution:

It seems that Rev. William R. Weeks, an extreme Calvinist of a community where Finney labored, opposed him on
theological grounds. He "held that both sin and holiness were produced in the mind by a direct act of Almighty Power;
that God made men sinners or holy at His sovereign discretion, but in both cases by a direct act of Almighty Power, an
act as irresistible as that of creation itself; that, in fact, God was the only proper agent in the universe, and that all
creatures acted, only as they were moved and compelled to act, by His irresistible power; that every sin in the universe,
both of men and of devils, was the result of a direct, irresistible act on the part of God."

Such an insane theology is certainly a blasphemous libel on God. Of course, a man holding such doctrines, and the
philosophy and methods that would naturally follow, would be led to oppose Finney. He, and others like him, wrote
letters abroad, misrepresenting the work and poisoning the minds of prominent leaders in Massachusetts and
Connecticut, A great cry and excitement was raised against "New Measures." He wrote a pamphlet, and so also did a
Unitarian. Evil reports spread far and near, until, at last, in the summer of 1827, a Convention was called to meet at
New Lebanon to inquire into the nature and evils of the late revivals in Central New York. Finney was, there, and the
pastors with whom he had labored.

The clergymen present from the East were Dr. Lyman Beecher, then the leading revival pastor of Boston and
Massachusetts; Dr. Herman Humphrey, president of Amherst College; Dr. Justin Edwards, of Andover, Mass.; Caleb J.
Tenney, of Wethersfield; and Dr. Joel Hawes, of Hartford, Conn. Upon Dr. Beecher and Asahel Nettleton was thrown
the responsibility of endeavoring to check the evils that were supposed to be fostered by Finney's work.[33]

The terrible thing is that the theologians are still persecuting Finney posthumously. I was reading in one other book about someone who wrote a book that criticizes the Keswick movement of the early part of the 20th century. According to this "scholarly" work, these men were in error. Whenever I read the works by men such as F.B. Meyer, Andrew Murray, R.A. Torrey and other Keswickians, I see a life and devotion to God that is not found in the works of those who spend their whole writing "ministry" criticizing others.

Do you notice that the theology of Mr. Weeks is quite similar to that of many of those today who write and speak against the faith movement. One critic of the faith movement has stated that it is an incorrect view of God's sovereignty that leads us to error. It amazes me how the Hyper-Calvinist[34] view of God's sovereignty that is often propagated as "Orthodox" is always the view that has brought "death" to so many revivals and moves of God. I wonder which view of His sovereignty does God believe is in error? Then again, may be I don't wonder.

Conclusion: The heresy hunters have caused quite a bit of stir in the church. They have caused the very division and strife that they often accuse those who they attack. They present themselves as "defenders of the faith" and "contenders for the truth." Yet they use false accusations, innuendo, and other ungodly methods to contend for this "truth." They are defending the truth as they see it. They claim to be modern day Bereans. I'm afraid that they do not qualify:

These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and
searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so. Therefore many of them believed.... - Acts 17:11-12b

The Bereans did not spend hours looking for holes in Paul and Sila's teaching. The Bereans searched the Scriptures daily to if these things are so. The Heresy Hunters are looking for Scriptures to prove that what those they criticize say are not so. The Bereans received the word with readiness of mind. The Heresy Hunters receive it with a mind ready to attack. Their mind is made up that what the person is saying is wrong. This is not a readiness of mind. It goes on to say that many of them believe. The only thing the Heresy Hunter believes is that he can bring down the ministry that he is attacking. He does not believe the Bible. He only believes his theological view of the Bible.

Listening to the Heresy Hunter can mean the difference between life and death for the Christian. If you desire to be miserable and joyless and to take on a critical spirit, join the heresy hunter crowd. If you desire to have life and peace, stay with the Word of God and stay away from those who make it their life's work to criticize others.

Notes

1.Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary (Springfield, MA: Miriam-Webster Inc., Publishers)
2.Apologetics - defense of the faith as originally presented to the Apostles and Prophets in the Bible. It is a homonym (two word that are
spelled and sound alike but have different meanings) of the word we normally used to express our regret for a wrong done.
3.Synan, Vinson The Holiness-Pentecostal Movement (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdman's Publishing Co., 1971), pp. 143, 144
4.Nichol, John Thomas Pentecostalism (New York: Harper and Row Publishers, 1966), p. 70
5.Quebedeaux, Richard The New Charismatics (Garden City, NY: Doubleday and Company, Inc., 1976), p. 173
6.Shelley, Harold P. Opposition To Radical Reform: Martin Luther Against Anabaptists and Radicals. An article written in the
1996 Alliance Academic Review (Camp Hill, PA: Christian Publications)
7.Pember, G.H. Earth's Earliest Ages (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 1876), p. 219 An excellent book, especially if you believe
in what is known as the "Gap Theory (A long time period between Genesis chapter one verses one and two). The main purpose of the
author was to explain how the false religions have managed to creep their way in since the beginning of time. In relation to George Muller,
Pember is quoting from an essay from a man named A.R. Wallace, who was a well known Naturalist and author.
8.Hux, Clete Profile: Word-Faith Movement (http://www.watchman.org) An otherwise good resource for finding information on cults,
Mr. Hux shows a terrible lack of research when it comes to Word-Faith churches.
9.Hagin, Kenneth E. Zoe: The God-Kind of Life (Tulsa, OK: Kenneth Hagin Ministries, 1989), pp. 35, 36, 41.
10.From www.letusreason.com I will be the first to admit that because I have not read every single book, listened to every single tape, or
read every newsletter, or even watched every television appearance of these teachers, I am not familiar with all of their statements. If these
statements that are quoted (and misquoted in many cases) are true then I will be the first to admit that the faith teachers have made it quite
difficult to defend them. Nevertheless, the disagreements on these issues should be DOCTRINAL and the tactics that are used by some of these so called "expose" ministries are just as heretical, if not more heretical, than the off the wall statements made by my Word of Faith brethren.
11.Word of faith sayings compiled by Jim Fox.
12.Spurgeon, Charles H. The Triumph of Faith in a Believer's Life (Lynnwood, WA: Emerald Books, 1994) p. 36. Compiled and edited
by Robert Hall.
13.Ibid., p. 128
14.Vine, W.E. Vine's Expository Dictionary of Biblical Words (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1985)
15.Meyer, Frederick B. Christ In Isaiah (Fort Washington, PA: Christian Literature Crusade) On page 69 Meyer compares "faith" to
natural "forces" such as the law of electricity and shows that we must obey the laws of "faith" as we obey the natural laws. Again, it is
necessary to remind the believer that this was written over a century ago and Meyer knew nothing about "Star Wars" or the New Age
movement. Though the Metaphysical movements were gaining popularity in his time, Meyer, like his contemporaries, despised this
ovement and it's teachings (see page 27 of his book, The Prophet of Hope from Christian Literature Crusade)
16.St. John, Stuart The "Faith" Movement May Be Prospering But Is It Healthy? (Can be found on the internet). The author in his
end notes challenges his readers that are sympathetic to the Word-Faith movement to give an explanation to a statements made by
Copeland and by Hagin. I may take him up on his challenge later. If anyone has a tape called "Following The Steps of Abraham (Part 1)"
by Kenneth Copeland I would appreciate a copy of a complete transcript.
17.Rev. Sun Myung Moon is the head of the Unification Church (a.k.a. The Moonies). Rev. Moon teaches that Christ did not come to
earth to be crucified but to set the right ideal. However he was not recognized for who he was and was crucified. The Unification church
says that in this respect Christ failed in his mission. Because of this failure God had to send a new messiah, the Rev. Moon. The Unification
church also teaches that Christ did not have a body after His resurrection but that He was resurrected as a spirit.
18.Kenyon, Essek W. Advanced Bible Course (Lynnwood, WA: Kenyon Gospel Publishing Society, 1970), p. 279
19.Marsh, Frederick E. 1,000 Bible Study Outlines (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications), p. 84
20.Kenyon, Essek W. What Happened from the Cross to the Throne (Lynnwood, WA: Kenyon Gospel Publishing Society, 1969), p. 40
21.Kenyon, Two Kinds of Righteousness (Lynnwood, WA: Kenyon Gospel Publishing Society, 1965), p. 9
22.Beard, Jeff, Freedom from the Faith Movement: The Personal Testimony of Jeff Beard (an article from the Testimony column of
the Christian Research Newsletter, Volume 3: Number 4, 1990) Christian Research Institute, San Juan Capistrano, CA
23.Synan, Vinson The Holiness-Pentecostal Movement (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdman's Publishing Co., 1971), p. 144
24.Beard, Jeff, Freedom from the Faith Movement: The Personal Testimony of Jeff Beard (an article from the Testimony column of
the Christian Research Newsletter, Volume 3: Number 4, 1990) Christian Research Institute, San Juan Capistrano, CA
25.Carden, Paul Christian Research Journal Book Reviews, 1994. Book Reviews" (a column from the Christian Research Journal, Fall
1994, page 46). Review of Curtis I Crenshaw's book, Man as God: The Word of Faith Movement. This review can still be found on
26.From an article titled "T.D. Jakes Accused Of Heresy For Trinity Views." From the Charisma News Service. Posted on the internet
by Maranatha Christian Journal.
27.Ibid.
28.Ibid.
29.Rouse, Ted Faith And The Pharisees (Tulsa, OK: Insight Publishing Group, 1999), p. 21
30.Anderson, Neil T. Helping Others Find Freedom In Christ (Ventura, CA: Regal Books, 1995), p. 32
31.Mayhue, Richard L. Who Surprised Whom: The Holy Spirit Or Jack Deere (Can be found on the internet). Mayhue is a senior vice
president and dean and also a professor of pastoral ministries.
32.Ibid.
33.Hills, Aaron M. Life Of Charles Finney (Spokane, WA: Holiness Data Ministry, 1902)
34.Hyper-Calvinism - An extreme interpretation of the writings of John Calvin never intended by this great reformer nor of his followers
afterwards who developed the theological system known today as Calvinism.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

Re: Seven Tactics of The 'Heresy Hunters' (Part 2) -- Sue da babe, 15:08:41 08/10/02 Sat